|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:06 pm
OmegaSeraph warblade_monk I am still disappointed with no monk sad if I don't see the monk or ninja soon I am gonna be very disappointed. barbarian is good from what I see. the avenger seems like an inquisitor. still need to go over the book more detailed on the other classes. either someone told me this or I read it somewhere, I cant remember... but Monks are coming, I dont know when, maybe in Players Handbook 3? if these is such a thing? but, assuming my sources are correct, they are planning to release the Monk class at some point in the future. They usually only launch two PHBs. I'd imagine they'll be in a campaign book.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:15 am
Dion Necurat OmegaSeraph warblade_monk I am still disappointed with no monk sad if I don't see the monk or ninja soon I am gonna be very disappointed. barbarian is good from what I see. the avenger seems like an inquisitor. still need to go over the book more detailed on the other classes. either someone told me this or I read it somewhere, I cant remember... but Monks are coming, I don't know when, maybe in Players Handbook 3? if these is such a thing? but, assuming my sources are correct, they are planning to release the Monk class at some point in the future. They usually only launch two PHBs. I'd imagine they'll be in a campaign book. My sources say there WILL be a Players Handbook 3, and Monk should be in it. I checked Wizard's D&D site and from the looks of the release schedule I don't think PH3 will be released this year. so I guess we can expect to see Monks in 2010...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 10, 2009 3:57 pm
I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:45 pm
Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:56 pm
Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker. Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:04 pm
Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker. Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:46 pm
PrismCity My sources say there WILL be a Players Handbook 3, and Monk should be in it. I checked Wizard's D&D site and from the looks of the release schedule I don't think PH3 will be released this year. so I guess we can expect to see Monks in 2010... The fact that they honestly sell a product where they expect you to buy 3 player's handbooks sickens me. 4th Ed. rules didn't kill D&D for me, Wizards' abusive marketing did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:01 pm
KamikaziFreak PrismCity My sources say there WILL be a Players Handbook 3, and Monk should be in it. I checked Wizard's D&D site and from the looks of the release schedule I don't think PH3 will be released this year. so I guess we can expect to see Monks in 2010... The fact that they honestly sell a product where they expect you to buy 3 player's handbooks sickens me. 4th Ed. rules didn't kill D&D for me, Wizards' abusive marketing did. Not if you have a subscription to D&D insider and a character builder. mrgreen Also, you're not expected to buy 3 handbooks. It helps, but they aren't required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:48 pm
Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker. Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class. Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:37 pm
Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker. Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class. Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 6:54 pm
Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht I have no love for the Monk class, but it should be done, since it's so damn popular. I think it would make a great Martial Controller class. Its a striker. Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class. Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker). And Druids. Druids are keen. But my Nerdheart belongs to Wardens. And my players are three strikers... With another wanting to join and play an Avenger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:27 pm
Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class. Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker). And Druids. Druids are keen. But my Nerdheart belongs to Wardens. And my players are three strikers... With another wanting to join and play an Avenger. Three strikers? The hell are they thinking? No, you as a DM have the sacred duty of screwing over their characters so they are FORCED to depend on other party classes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:35 pm
Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Of course it is. Because they keep putting the popular classes in Striker. Wizard is a popular class. Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker). And Druids. Druids are keen. But my Nerdheart belongs to Wardens. And my players are three strikers... With another wanting to join and play an Avenger. Three strikers? The hell are they thinking? No, you as a DM have the sacred duty of screwing over their characters so they are FORCED to depend on other party classes. Nonsense. The "DM is the enemy" routine is tired. The real challenge for me is coming up with enemy groups that are difficult for them, without being overwhelming. And besides, if you can't make the character you want to play, why play? No one should be forced to be a defender or leader if they don't like any of the classes available in that role.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:47 pm
Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker). And Druids. Druids are keen. But my Nerdheart belongs to Wardens. And my players are three strikers... With another wanting to join and play an Avenger. Three strikers? The hell are they thinking? No, you as a DM have the sacred duty of screwing over their characters so they are FORCED to depend on other party classes. Nonsense. The "DM is the enemy" routine is tired. The real challenge for me is coming up with enemy groups that are difficult for them, without being overwhelming. And besides, if you can't make the character you want to play, why play? No one should be forced to be a defender or leader if they don't like any of the classes available in that role. At the same time, you need a balanced group. Strikers may hit hard, but they only have one suitable defense and cannot take hits like the monsters give in V4. Having a group of strikers is dangerous. You're not being an evil DM by making sure your group is successful. It may be evil to them to make them switch characters, but they will also complain when and if their characters die (and with that kind of party, I'm anticipating it).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:52 pm
Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Dion Necurat Jonas Albrecht Sure, but compared to Sorcerer, Rogue, Monk? Still a decent class. They're only popular because they deal big damage to one character and have the opportunity to shift as part of the attack (standard for most strikers). Wizards/Invokers, on the other hand, deal massive damage to a large group of enemies with a variety of different effects. In every campaign party, you should have at least two strikers, a defender, a leader, and a controller. Now, odds are you aren't going to get that; instead, you'll have a variety (I consider fighters a combination of Defender and Striker). And Druids. Druids are keen. But my Nerdheart belongs to Wardens. And my players are three strikers... With another wanting to join and play an Avenger. Three strikers? The hell are they thinking? No, you as a DM have the sacred duty of screwing over their characters so they are FORCED to depend on other party classes. Nonsense. The "DM is the enemy" routine is tired. The real challenge for me is coming up with enemy groups that are difficult for them, without being overwhelming. And besides, if you can't make the character you want to play, why play? No one should be forced to be a defender or leader if they don't like any of the classes available in that role. At the same time, you need a balanced group. Strikers may hit hard, but they only have one suitable defense and cannot take hits like the monsters give in V4. Having a group of strikers is dangerous. You're not being an evil DM by making sure your group is successful. It may be evil to them to make them switch characters, but they will also complain when and if their characters die (and with that kind of party, I'm anticipating it). I made it clear to them that they should try to balance their party better, but they had their hears set on the classes they chose. All that's left to me is to write a good story and challenge them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
